Indeed!

The site certainly makes its point clearly enough.  And the pictures are great.  The one of the polar bear sticking out his/her purple tongue has popped up in Gristmill a few times now -- and that is fine by me!  Also, the "polar bear cub leaning forward" is probably a baby shot of Knut, who won the cuteness prize not too long ago.

Optimally, though, it would be useful to report in detail on the economics and politics of hunting in Alaska.  A recent effort to ban aerial hunting of wolves in that state was defeated, thanks to the efforts of some trophy-hunting groups.  But aerial hunting had been illegal for a considerable number of years, before it was legalized again.  So apparently the Alaskans are capable of some nuance, when it comes to hunting and predators.

Who in Alaska actually makes a lot of money from hunting predators?  What influence do they have on Sarah Palin?  How many Alaskans buy the Palinesque argument (though she is hardly the only one to make it) that it is necessary, and even morally enjoined, to kill predators, so that there will be enough meat-providing animals (e.g. moose, deer, caribou, salmon, etc.) available for human consumption?

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

Only a dork who thinks he's smart would use it.

Canis, actually, there is nothing wrong with this line of thought:

"How many Alaskans buy the Palinesque argument (though she is hardly the only one to make it) that it is necessary, and even morally enjoined, to kill predators, so that there will be enough meat-providing animals (e.g. moose, deer, caribou, salmon, etc.) available for human consumption?"

I consider this to be a legitimate arguement with a critical caveat. Most people are not interested in eating wolves. The vast majority of hunters find it morally reprehensible to kill and animal and not eat it. You don't have to personally eat it, but someone has to eat it. Cutting off a trophy and leaving the carcass is considered in hunting circles a gross violation of hunting mores. Hence the concern about aerial hunting. Flying over in a fixed wing aircraft, shooting and animal and then flying on is a major no go. If you can't land, gut the animal, take the meat........ you are crossing the line.

Also there is a clear cut certain lack of sportsmanship in hunting from an aircraft, and most hunters would be at the least uncomfortable with that approach, and consider it unsportsmanlike.

But Alaska is rural, and rural society is hunting society. So while you might well get many Alaskans criticizing aerial hunting you will barely find any at all who would criticize hunting in itself. Just forget that. Never going to happen.

Victory in Pattani

"It might make a good video, a full size puppet of Palin, stuffed with meat, thrown to a Polar bear?  Could it be molded out of edible materials? Hehey.

A good way to get the point across."

No, it's not a good way to get the point across. But it is a good way to help McCain / Palin get elected.

Victory in Pattani

It's truly a sad day when an allegedly  "progressive" forum removes your comments, even the one about the polar bears!

Shame on YOU!